Augustus John Cuthbert Hare.

The Central law journal, Volume 28 online

. (page 14 of 151)
Online LibraryAugustus John Cuthbert HareThe Central law journal, Volume 28 → online text (page 14 of 151)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


the business of a8sa3rlng and sampling ores, are exempt
from execution to the extent of |800, under Colorado
law.— FTaitoA v, Lederer, 8. C. Colo., Oct. 81, 1888; 19 Pac.
Bep. 602.

101. Fraudulent Conyetances— Husband and Wife.
A husband, while solvent, conveyed land to his

wife of the value of money belonging to her, which he
had used In his own business, with the express agree*
ment that he would return It In land : SOd, that his
creditors could not attack the dee6,—Hackworth v, Johm,
Ky. Ct. App., Nov. 19. 1888; 9 8. W. Bep. 666.

102. Fraudulent Conybtancb— Husband and Wife.

The deed In question between husband and wife

was held not to be void as to creditors.— Wooden v.
Wooden, 8. C. Mich., Nov. 1, 1888; 40 N. W. Bep. 460.

108. Fraudulent Conyetancb— Knowledge of Pur-
chaser: Under the evidence the sale of the stock of

goods was fraudulent as to creditors, and the pur-
chaser had knowledge thereof .—£/«in v. Simpson, 8. C.
Tex., Oct. 80, 1888; 9 8. W. Bep. 662.

104. Fraudulent Conybtances — Begularlty.

Where all parties testify that the sale of chattels under
a lien and a mortgage were fair, and the sheriff made
the sale, and it was regularly advertised. It may be sus-
tained, though it was made hastily and without proper
attention to detail, and the goods were not at once re-
moved .—ifo^etfer V, Cloifton, 8. C. 8. Car., Oct. 12, 1888; 7
8. E. Bep. 844.

105. Fraudulent Conyetancb— Trespass. Under

Texas law, a voluntary conveyance of all the property
owned by one, who has commenced to trespass on land
by cutting timber thereon with intent to continue. Is
fraudulent as to a Judgment recovered, as well for the
trespasses before, as after, the conveyance.— Cole v.
TerrtU, 8. C. Tex., Oct. 28, 1888; 9 8. W. Bep. 688.

106. Guardian and Ward— Settlement. A release,

given after maintaining his majority, by a ward to his
guardian with a full knowledge of all the facts, will not
be set aside.— Z>av<f v. Hagler, 8. C. Kan., Nov. 10, 1888; 19
Pao. Bep. 628.

107. Garnishment— Cify—8econd-clas8. A city of

the second-class cannot be garnished.- 5id<«er v. CUy
of WslHnpton, 8. C. Kan., Nov. 10, 1886 ; 19 Pac. Bep. 620.

108. Homestead — Execution — Allotment. Judg -

xnent was entered in 1864, and a sale thereunder was
made in 1879: ITeM, that the creditor could satisfy his



Jndgnnent out of the exempt property If there was not
sufficient other property, but the debtor was entitled to
have his homestead exemption set off, and to enjoy the
part remaining after the satisfaction of the debt, an^
without such allotment the execution sale was void.*-
MorHson v, Watson, 8. O. N. Oar., Nov. 12, 1888 ; 7 8. E. Bep.
795.

100. Husband and Wdtb— Covenants— EstoppeL

In Dakota a married woman who, with her husband,,
executes a mortgnge upon her land, with covenants of
seizin, quiet possession and warranty as security for a
loan. Is estopped from setting up title acquired after a
foreclosure sale thereunder, though the mortgage is a
mere lien.— Terkes v. Hadley, 8. C. Dak. Oct. 6, 1888; 40 N.
W. Bep. 840.

110. Husband and Wife— Public Land— Community

Property. A and his wife occupied public land from

1847 to 1866, when she died. He continued to occupy it,
and received a deed for it In 1871 from the town under
act of congress of 1866: J7e/<i, that the land was not
community property, and the wife was vested with no
ownership therein,— Labish v. Hardy, 8. C. Cal., Nov. 8,
1888; 19 Pac. Bep. 581.

111. Husband and Wifb— 8eparate Estate— Mortgage.

Georgia law does not prevent a wife from Joining

with her husband in mortgaging, for her husband's
debts, property conveyed by the husband to a trustee
for the wife's sole benefit, the trustee being authorized
in the deed to mortgage the property on request of the
of the husband and wife.- ^rotfnox v, JEtna Ins, Co,, U. 8.
8. C, Nov. 19, 1888; 9 8. C. Bep. 61.

112. Husband and Wife— 8eparate Property— Mort-
gage. When a wife has recorded in the county

where she lives a list of her property, according to
Montana law she will not, as against her husband's
mortgagee, be estopped from claiming It merely by
allowing her husband to have possession and control
of it, during which possession he executed the mort-
gage.— Poima* V, Murray, 8. C. Mont., 8ept. 15, 1888; 19
Pac. Bep. 658.

118. Infant — Guardian's Contract— Bescission.

Where an infant promptly rescinds his guardian's con-
tract on attaining his majority, offering to reconvey on
repayment of the money advanced, and sues therefor
within three months thereafter, his retention of the
property in the meantime is not a ratification of the
purchase.— Scott v, Scott, 8. C. 8. Car.. Oct. 12,1888; 7 8. E.
Bep. 811.

114. Injunction— Eeview— Finding. An injunction

restraining the unlawful erection of a building across a
public alley, will not be disturbed on the sole ground
that the chancellor erred In finding that complainant
had made ont a case of special damage.— CoJkMi v. Bank
of Georgia, 8. O. Ga., Oct. 24, 1888; 7 8. E. Bep. 811.

115. Injunction— Temporary— Wrongs Prevented.

Where a corporation had contracted with another to
build its road for certain stock and bonds, but the latter
corporation did not build the road In the time ap-
pointed, and the stock and bonds were not tendered,
and by stratagem and surprise at an adjourned meet-
ing of the first corporation new directors were elected
and the road was placed In the hands of others . Held,
that a temporary injunction would issue against any
action of the latter parties.— ^Tmp York ^ B. B. T, Co, v,
ParroU, U. 8. C. C. (Conn.), Oct. 28, 1888; 36 Fed. Bep.
462.

116. INSURANCE— Apportionment— Equity. Where

there Is a claim against several insurance companies
for the same loss upon different policies, a court of
equ'ty has jurisdiction to apportion the loss among the
respective companies, and require payment from each
of the amount for which it is lUbie,— Fuller v, Detroit F,
(f M, Ins. Co., U. 8. C. C. (lU.), Oct. 29, 1888; 36 Fed. Bep.
469.

117. INSURANCE— Application— Filling Out. Where

an agent of an insurance company fills out the applica-
tlon, presenting it to the applicant for his signature^
but not acquainting him with the contents, the repre-



Digitized by



Google



Vol. 28



THE OENTBAL LAW JOURNAIi



47



tentatlons therein made are concIoBlve against the
company.— Z>ttn6<H* v. Phanix Tn$. Co., S. 0. WLs., Not. 8,
1888;40N.W.Bep. 886.

118. INSURAHCB — Life — Application by Agent.

Where a life insurance agent assumes the lesponsibility
t>f filling out a blank application, and the applicant,
presuming that he has acted honestly, 8i£^s it without
any knowledge of its contents, a recovery ma> be had
on the policy, though certain representations be ma
terlally talBe.— Temmink v. MetropottUtn L, Ins. Co., 8. 0.
Mich., Nov. 1, 1888; 40 N. W. Sep. 469.

119. iHSUBAiroB— life— Rights of Creditors. Insur-

mnoe on the lUe of a husband, taken out by the wife, or
t>y him for the benefit of herself and children. In a State
whose statutes make the proceeds payable to the wife
or children, free from the claims of the husband's cred-
itors, cannot be recovered by such creditors, though
the husband was insolvent when the policies were Is-
sued and the premiums were paid out of his money.—
Ceniral N. Bank v. Hume, U. S. S. C, Nov. 12, 1888; 9 S. 0.
Bep.41.

130. IvsuBiiiOS — Limitations— Minors. ^A stipula-
tion In an accident Insurance policy, limiting the time
within which suit shall be brought, is valid, and runs
during the minority of the beneficiaries, there being no
exception In their tBYor.—SuggM «. Travelen* Im. Co., S.
O. Tez., Oct. 86, 1888; 9 8. W. Rep. 676.

121. IVTOXIOATIMO LiQUORB— Questions for Jury.

Under a trial for pursuing the occupation of selling

. liquor without a license, a charge that different sales at
different times, near each other, to different parties,
oould constitute the occupation of selling, under Texas
law, states an incorrect rule, and is a charge on the
weight of the evidence.— ife/Z^ynoMf v. 8taU, Tex. Gt.
App., Nov. 8, 1888; 9 8. W. Rep. 617.

122. iNVBMTioiis — Infringement — Injunction. A

telephone patentee, who has put his device Into exten-
sive use and is receiving an Income therefrom, is en-
titled to an Injunction against its infringement, though
he has withdrawn it from a particular 8tate because of
legislative Interference limiting the rate of charges.—
American, etc. Co. v. Cuetmam, etc. Co., U. 8. G. 0. (Ind.),
Oct. 29, 1888; 86 Fed. Rep. 488.

12S. INTBNTION8 — Patents — Cancellation. The

United States can maintain a bill In equity to cancel a
patent for an invention obtained through fraud.—
UnUed States v. AmeHeam B. T. Co., U. 8. 8. O., Nov. 12,
1888; 9 8.0. Rep. 90.

124. IRVSHTIOMS- Pitching Barrels. Claim No. 1 of

patent 42.&80, to Holbeck and Gottfried, for pitching
barrels Is Invalid. Claim No. 2 Is not infringed by the
use of an irremovable conductor in an apparatus for
pitching barrels by means of a hot air blast.— Cirefoeiit
B. Co. V. Qot^/Hed, U. 8. 8. C, Nov. 6, 1888; 9 8. 0. Rep. 88.

125. JUDGMBNT- Equitable Relief -Injunction. A

borrowed money from a guardian through B, who
acted as agent, and to whom as trustee a deed of trust
was executed as security. C purchased part of the
property, and B agreed to release such part from the
deed of trust upon payment of the purchase money to
him or to the guaraian ; it was paid to the guardian :
ffdd, that equity would enjoin a ludgment In ejectment
recovered by the ward after coming of age on a title
acquired by purchase under the deed of trust.— Jbftn-
son 9. Christian, U. 8. 8. C, Nov. 5, 1888; 9 8. U.Rep. 87.

126. JuDOMBirr— Motion to 8et Aside— Venue. A

motion to set aside a judgment can only be beard in the
county where the action is pending, unless consentap-
pears from written stipulation, or a recital in the order,
or by implication from presence at the hearing without
objection, and the objection may be taken in the su-
preme court without objection or assignment of error.
—Goodwin V. Monds, 8. C. N. Car., Nov. 12,1888; 7 8. B.
Bep.798.

127. JimoMBHr— Non-resident— Service. A judg-
ment against a non-resident, who did not appear, on a
rtttom not found, no affidavit nor order of publication



being found In the record. Is a nullity. — Palmer v,
McMaster, 8. C. Mont., Sept. 16, 1888; 19 Pac. Rep. 686.

128. JiTBT— Payment of Jury Fee. The Texas law^

directing that a demand for a jury shall be made and
the jury fee paid upon the first day of the term. Is not
strictly mandatory.— i4f/€» v. Pluwuner, 8. C. Tex., Oct.
28, 1888; 9 8. W. Rep. 672.

129. JUBISDICTION— Administratrix. The adminis-
tratrix of A, appointed In Nebraska, may sue In Ne«
braska for damages for the killing of A in Kansas.— ifa.
P. n. Co. V. Lends, 8. C. Neb., Nov. 28, 1888; 40 N. W. Rep.
401.

180. JUBI8DI0TION— Courts — Military Reservation.*—
In Montana, a district court of the Territory has juris-
diction to try an indictment for murder committed on
a military reservation.— Aut^Mt v. Territory, 8. C. Mont.,
Sept. 16, 1888; 19 Pac. Rep. 668.

181. JUBISDIOTIOM— Federal— Crimes. The courts

of the United States have no common law jurisdiction
in criminal cases, nor of an assault with a dangerous
weapon on the high seas, unless committed on board of
an American YeBsel.^ United States v. Lewis, U. 8. O. 0.
(Oreg.), Nov. 10, 1888; 36 Fed. Rep. 449.

182. JUSTIGB OF THB Pbaob — Jury — Findings. —
Where a judgment Is based on a verdict of the jury. It
Is unnecessary for the justice to make findings of fact.
—Dye V. BusseU, 8. C. Neb., Nov. 21, 1888; 40 N. W. Rep. 416.

188. Lahdlobd ahd Tbmant —Lease— Surrender.-— ^
A stipulation In a lease that the lessee will surrender to
the lessor when he desires to proceed with contem-
plated Improvements Is but a covenant, the breach of
which only gives the lessor a right of action for dam-
ages.— aar^lofMi V. FrofwUy, 8. C. Wis., Nov. 8, 1888; 40 N.
W. Rep. 872.

184. LociTATiOMS- Adverse Possession. — A valid
sheriff's sale of land breaks the chain of title of defend-
ant in execution, remaining In possession after the
sale and claiming title under the statute of limitations
of three years and against the bolder of the title, which
passed by the sheriff's sale.— i^lusi v. Rogers, 8. 0. Tex.,
Nov. 9, 1888; 9 8. W. Rep. 696.

186. LnfiTATiONS- Lands — Indians. Under Ne-
braska and federal laws, an Indian may come into the
courts and litigate his title to land, and, when he is not
shown to be uneducated or unfamiliar with the laws,
the statute of limitations will not run against him.—
Fm»v.Pa»rick,V.H. 0.0. (Neb.), Oct. 29, 1888; tt Fed.
Rep. 467.

186. LnoTATioirs— Notes— Payment. The maker

of a note agreed in writing to send to the payee certain
harrows. The payee was to pay the freight and credit
|60 on ^he notes : JJe/d, that the indorsement, as affect-
ing the limitation of an action on the notes, was to be
made when the freight reached Its destination.- SmKoii
V. Lamb, 8. C. Mich., Nov. 1, 1888; 40 N. W. Rep. 467.

187. LiMlTATioiiS— Payment — Presumption. The

statute providing that a presumption of payment shall
arise within ten years after the right of action shall
have accrued, only raises a presumption, which may
be rebutted.— C«rHe v. Clark, 8. C. N. Car., Nov. 12, 1888;
7 8. B. Rep. 806.

188. LIMITATIONS— Real Bstate— Sunning of Statute.—
A recovered land by ejectment from B In 1876. B sub-
sequently discovered that A's deed was a forgery, and
sued A, but A relied on the former owner's oiitdtabd-
ing title, and B could not prove the forgery. In 1882 B
sued in equity, setting out the former suits and the
facts concerning the forgery : Held, that the action Is
not barred, under Missouri law.— i^imn v. Miller, 8. 0.
Mo., Nov. 12, 1888; 9 8. W. Rep. 640.

139. Mandamus— Bridge. The necessary means to

rebuild a bridge over a navigable river, which the
county is charged with the duty of maintaining, not
being in the treasury, and the county board not having
been authorized in the manner prescribed by law to
levy a tax or issue bonds to raise the same, the board
cannot be compelled by mandtunus to rebuild the bridge.



Digitized by



Google



48



THE CENTRAL LAW JOURNAL.



No. 2



Siaie v. Wood County, 8. 0. Wis., Nov. 8, 1888; 40 K. W.
Bep. 381.

140. Mabitihb Libns— GoodB—Speoulation. There

Is no lien for salt parchased by the owners of a steamer
to be taken to another port and sold upon execution,
the same not having been furnished as supplies.— TA«
Wyoming, U. S. D. O. (Mo.), Oct. 90, 1888; 86 Fed. Bep. 493.

141. BfARiTiMB LncNS— Mortgage — Priority. The

lien of a material man for supplies and repairs fur-
nished in a home port, given by a State statute, is en*
titled to priority over a mortgage on the vessel re-
paired, although such mortgage had been duly re-
corded before such supplies and repairs were fur-
nished.— C/yde V, Steam T, Co., U. 8. 0. O. (N. Oar.), Aug.
18, 1888; 86 Fed. Bep. 001.

142. Maritime Libn— Bepalrs — Personal Credit.

A shipwright in Jersey Oity solicited work at the ofBce
of the ship owner's representative in New York. The
boat was sent to him to be repaired. He took a note on
account and afterwards renewed it. He made no claim
against the boat for eight or nine months, and after it
been mortgaged : Held that, under the circumstances,
the repairs must be done on personal credit only.— 7%«
Jamee FarreU, U. 8. D. 0. (N. Y.), Nov. 1, 1888; 86 Fed.
Bep. 600.

143. Maritiub Lodn— Supplies— Presumption. ^Ma-
terial men furnished supplies in New York to a vessel
registered in New Jersey, but whose business home
was in New York city, upon the order of the charterers,
who did business in New York, and who had no au-
thority fiom the owner to pledge the vessel for sup-
plies : Htid that, in the absence of any evidence of a
common intent to charge the ship, no maritime Hen
ai'ose for the supplies.— 7A« Aeronaut, U. 8. D. 0. (N. Y.),
Oct. 11, 1888; 36 Fed. Bep. 497.

144. Marriage— License— Inquiry. A, as register

of B county. Issued a marriage license for two persons
In an adjoining county on the application of 0. O told
A that that the woman's parents were living, that she
was eighteen or nineteen years old, and Hhat all the
parties lived In the adjoining county: ^«M, that the
license was Issued without reasonable Inquiry, under
North Carolina law.— ira/tof?w v. Bodges, 8. 0. N. Car.,
Nov. 5, 1888; 7 8. E. Bep. 786.

145. Master and SERVANT—Negllgence— Contributory.

Defendant had ordered the unloading of a mill

from a wagon near a railroad. The driver of the wagon
left the horses without unhitching them or blocking the
wheels. While the mill was being unloaded the horses
were frightened by a passing train, and the mill fell on
the plaintiffs foot: Held, that the master was not 11a-
h\e,SUffen r. Mayer, 8. 0. Mo., Nov. 12, 1888; 9 8. W. Bep.
630.

146. Mechanic's Liens— Subcontractor— Notice.

Under Dakota law, in a mechanic's Hen case, where the
only evidence on the part of the subcontractor Is, that
the principal part of the materials was furnished before
the notice was given to the owner, no foundation Is laid
for the introduction of the notice of lien filed with the
clerk of the district court, and It Is properly excluded.
McMUkm V. PhilUpe, 8. 0. Dak., Oct. 1, 1888; 40 N. W. Bep.
849.

147. MORTOAOE— Foreclosure— Marshaling Assets.

One of two joint mortgagors of an $8,000 mortgage, who
sells land to the mortgagee and takes In payment an
assignment of a 14,800 Interest In the mortgage bond. Is
entitled, on foreclosure, to have his interest in the
mortgage first satisfied.- ^ttifintn v. Brown 8. C. Mich.,
Nov. 1, 1888; 40 N. W. Bep. 886.

148. Mortgages— Becordlng. In Louisiana, since

the act of 1855, an unrecorded mortgage is invalid as to
third persons, though they have full knowledge of it.—
Ridinge v. Johnton, U. 8. 8. C, Nov. 12, 1888; 9 8. 8. C. Bep.
72.

149. MORTOAGE—Belease— Penalty. Where a mort-
gagor has fully paid the note secured by mortgage
without notice that the note had been assigned, the
assignment not being recorded, and the mortgagee has



failed to release the mortgage within a reasonable time
after demand to do so, the mortgagee is liable for the
penalty prescribed by law in such cases. — Perktm v.
Matteeon, 8. C. Kan., Nov. 10, 1888; 19 Pac. Bep. 633.
150. Municipal Corporations — Control of Streets —

Changing Grade. The act of 1883 did not authorize the

city of Detroit to bridge railroad tracks for a street cross-
ing, nor to construct an ascending gn^ade of the street to
the bridge, and the depreciation of the property front-
ing on the street, caused by such grading. Is a taking of
private property for public use, which Is authorized
only by proceedings to condemn. — Schneider v. City of
DetroU, 8. C. Mich., Nov. 1, 1888; 40 N. W. Bep. 329.

161. Municipal Corporations— Debts — Constitution.

The provision of the constitution of Texas, that

no debt shall ever be created by any city unless at the
same time provision be made for taxation for Its pay-
ment, applies to all cities alike. — City of Terrell v. Die-
eaint, 8. C. Tex., Nov. 16, 1888; 9 8. W. Bep. 593.

162. Municipal OoRPORATiONS-Flre— Liability. A

city Is not liable for damages caused by fire originating
in a wooden building erected contrary to Its ordinance
creating fire limits, though It took no steps to prevent
Its erection. — Hinee «. City of Charlotte, 8. C. Mich., Nov.
1,1888;40N. W. Bep. 888.

158. Municipal Corporations — Street Ballroads —

Forfeiture. An ordinance of a city requiring a

street railway company to construct its road In a cer-
tain manner and on certain streets, under Wisconsin
law becomes a part of its charter, and upon non-com-
pliance It may be required to surrender its charter by
quo warranto.— State v. Madieon S. R. R., 8. C. Wis., Nov.
8,1888;40N. W. Bep. 487.

154. NEGLIGENCE- Contributory — Jury. Where

the plaintiff knew of the excavation across the side-
walk, and passing by on a dark night attempted to go
around It, but misjudged the distance and fell In and
was Injured, it was held that the question of contribu-
tory negligence was for the jury. — Village of Orleane v.
Perry, 8. C. Neb., Nov. 22, 1888; 40 N. W. Bep. 417.

166. Payment- Check. Payment by check Is not

absolute, but conditional, unless expressly so agreed.—
Good V. Singleton, 8. C. Minn., Nov. 8, 1888; 40 N. W. Bep.
859.

156. PLEADING— Complaint— Demurrer. A com-
plaint alleging, that through the default in the payment
of Interest plaintiff, under an option given In the note,
has declared the whole principal and Interest Immedi-
ately due and payable, a demurrer on the ground that
the action Is prematlvely brought, does not present the
question whether or not the option has been properly
exercised.— Foc^c M. X. Co. v. Shepardson, 8. 0. Cal., Nov.
16, 1888; 19 Pac. Bep. 588.

167. PLEADINOS-Defects- Verdict. Where plaint-
iff sues a city for damaflres for injuries sustained by
reason of the defective condition of the sidewalk, and
does not allege that the city had notice thereof, and
the defendant does not demur or move relative thereto,
such defect is cured by verdict, though defendant ob-
jected to the introduction of any evidence, on the
ground that by reason thereof the petition did not state
a cause of action. — Hurst v. City of Ash Qrove, 8. C. Mo.,
Nov. 12, 1888; 9 8. W. Bep. 031.

168. Pleading — Fraud. A party charging frand

and misrepresentation must plead the facts, and a mere
allegation thereof Is not sufficient. — Tepoel v, Saunders
C. If. Bank, 8. C. Neb., Nov. 21, 1888; 40 N. W. Bep. 416.

169. PLEADING— Mortgage— Foreclosure. Where a

suit is brought upon certain promissory notes, and to
foreclose the mortgage given to secure them, the con-
tents and conditions of the mortgage being alleged and
the answer is not verified, and the petition Is not at-
tacked by motion, exceptions, or otherwise, the mort-
gage is to be taken by the court as true and the fore-
closure may be decreed.— .Com v. Sdson, 8. 0. Kan., Nov.
10, 1888; 19 Pac. Bep. 685.

160. PLEADINO—Beplevin— Mortgagee. A mortgagee

of chattels, who brings an action of replevin against



Digitized by



Google



Vol.. 28.



THE CENTRAL LAW JODICNAL.



4,9



another mortgagee, without showing the conditions of
fal8 mortgage or breach thereof, fails to make out a
•oanse of action. ~ MadUon if. Bank v. Farmer, B. 0. Dak.
Oot. 1, 1888; 40 N. W. Sep. 846.

161. PLCADniQ — Verification — Olerk. A. notary

pnblio, who l« clerk of an attorney, may administer an
•oath to verify a pleading prepared by such attorney. —
Sckn^Ur N, Bamk v.BoUong, 8. 0. Neb., Nov. SI, 1888; 40 N.
W. Bep. 4U.

182. PosT-oinCB— Mali— Fraud. A person changed

•the mailing stamp- on a letter so as to deceive an in-
-surance company and prevent a forfeiture : JTie/rf, that
the case was not within U. S. Rev. 8t. { 5480, relative to.
opening correspondence by mall for purposes of de-
frauding.— C7fi<tod 3taU» V, MUcheU, U. 8. D. 0. (Pa.), Oct.
:24, 1888; 86 Fed. Rep. 492.

168. PSAOTIOB— Fraud— Instructions. In an action

ior false representations it is proper to charge that
fraud will not be presumed under slight circumstances.
— SwMne^v. IMems, 8.0. Mich., Nov. 1,1888; 40 N. W
Bep. 454.

164. PRAonoa— Jury— Summoning. The court can

•oallin talesmen to supply a deficiency in the panel,
and when there is not a petit Jury to determine any
•civil or criminal cause, the marshal or his deputy shall
by order of the court return Jurymen from the by-stand-
ers sufllclent to complete the panel, under the acts of
congress. — Lov^ov v. United 8UUe$, U. 8. 8. 0., Nov. 5,
a888;9 8.0. Rep. 67.

166. Practigb — New Trial — Newly -discovered Bvi-

•dence. When in a petition for a new trial it appears

4hat the petitioner has discovered new evidence which,
in connection with that given at the trial would entitle
him to a Judgment, o^lnarily a new trial should be
.granted.— McDonald v. Early , 8. 0. Neb., Nov. 21, 1888; 40
N. W. Rep. 410.

166. Praotiob— Trial — Exclusion of Evidence. ^A

•court may admit apparently irrelevant testimony upon



Online LibraryAugustus John Cuthbert HareThe Central law journal, Volume 28 → online text (page 14 of 151)